<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_09_1824234</id>
	<title>Researchers Neutralize Parkinson's Dopamine Killers</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1257753720000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>futurity.org writes with news that Iowa State researchers have made a breakthrough  that could eventually lead to a <a href="http://futurity.org/health-medicine/parkinsons-dopamine-killers-identified/">cure for Parkinson's</a>.  Identifying the protein that kills the dopamine-producing cells in the brain has allowed the researchers to disable it and could be the first step in the development of new treatments.  <i>"Now, Kanthasamy&rsquo;s group is looking for additional compounds that also can serve to neutralize protein kinase-C. By identifying more compounds that perform the function of neutralizing kinase-C, researchers are more likely to locate one that works well and has few side effects.  This discovery is expected to provide new treatment options to stop the progression of the disease or even cure it. 'Once we find the compound, we need to make sure it&rsquo;s safe. If everything goes well, it could take about 10 years, and then we might be able to see something that will truly make a difference in the lives of people with this disorder,' says Kanthasamy."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>futurity.org writes with news that Iowa State researchers have made a breakthrough that could eventually lead to a cure for Parkinson 's .
Identifying the protein that kills the dopamine-producing cells in the brain has allowed the researchers to disable it and could be the first step in the development of new treatments .
" Now , Kanthasamy    s group is looking for additional compounds that also can serve to neutralize protein kinase-C. By identifying more compounds that perform the function of neutralizing kinase-C , researchers are more likely to locate one that works well and has few side effects .
This discovery is expected to provide new treatment options to stop the progression of the disease or even cure it .
'Once we find the compound , we need to make sure it    s safe .
If everything goes well , it could take about 10 years , and then we might be able to see something that will truly make a difference in the lives of people with this disorder, ' says Kanthasamy .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>futurity.org writes with news that Iowa State researchers have made a breakthrough  that could eventually lead to a cure for Parkinson's.
Identifying the protein that kills the dopamine-producing cells in the brain has allowed the researchers to disable it and could be the first step in the development of new treatments.
"Now, Kanthasamy’s group is looking for additional compounds that also can serve to neutralize protein kinase-C. By identifying more compounds that perform the function of neutralizing kinase-C, researchers are more likely to locate one that works well and has few side effects.
This discovery is expected to provide new treatment options to stop the progression of the disease or even cure it.
'Once we find the compound, we need to make sure it’s safe.
If everything goes well, it could take about 10 years, and then we might be able to see something that will truly make a difference in the lives of people with this disorder,' says Kanthasamy.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038876</id>
	<title>Re:I don't know</title>
	<author>makuabob</author>
	<datestamp>1257763920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems a bit off-color for humor, but...
<p>This is GOOD news! When it pans out, I have relatives who will be better.
<br>C'mon! Lighten up, be happy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems a bit off-color for humor , but.. . This is GOOD news !
When it pans out , I have relatives who will be better .
C'mon ! Lighten up , be happy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems a bit off-color for humor, but...
This is GOOD news!
When it pans out, I have relatives who will be better.
C'mon! Lighten up, be happy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038712</id>
	<title>Re:I don't know</title>
	<author>noundi</author>
	<datestamp>1257763260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This research seems kinda shaky.</p></div><p> <i>T</i>h<i>a</i>t<i>'s</i> n<i>o</i>t <i>f</i>u<i>n</i>n<i>y.</i></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This research seems kinda shaky .
That 's not funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This research seems kinda shaky.
That's not funny.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038008</id>
	<title>BmoD up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257760380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Kreskin Comprehensive be forgotten in a benefits of being Official GGNA irc</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kreskin Comprehensive be forgotten in a benefits of being Official GGNA irc [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kreskin Comprehensive be forgotten in a benefits of being Official GGNA irc [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042752</id>
	<title>Re:I don't know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257794160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ba-dum TSK.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ba-dum TSK .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ba-dum TSK.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037734</id>
	<title>Re:Wouldn't it be nice if this were NOT vapor?</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1257759180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, it certainly would be nice.</p><p>Especially when you consider there appear to be links between Parkinson&rsquo;s, Alzheimer&rsquo;s.</p><p><a href="http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/36/20/23-a" title="psychiatryonline.org">http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/36/20/23-a</a> [psychiatryonline.org]</p><p>There has been other research suggesting that understanding one of these diseases leads to avenues of research for the other.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it certainly would be nice.Especially when you consider there appear to be links between Parkinson    s , Alzheimer    s.http : //pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/36/20/23-a [ psychiatryonline.org ] There has been other research suggesting that understanding one of these diseases leads to avenues of research for the other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it certainly would be nice.Especially when you consider there appear to be links between Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s.http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/36/20/23-a [psychiatryonline.org]There has been other research suggesting that understanding one of these diseases leads to avenues of research for the other.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30041062</id>
	<title>Re:Wouldn't it be nice if this were NOT vapor?</title>
	<author>simplexion</author>
	<datestamp>1257775740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Although Alzheimer&rsquo;s disease (AD) and Parkinson&rsquo;s disease (PD) are distinct neurological disorders, previous studies have indicated that as many as 25 percent of patients with AD develop PD-like symptoms, and some PD patients develop signs of AD as well.</p></div><p>It's pretty normal to lose your mind as you get old.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although Alzheimer    s disease ( AD ) and Parkinson    s disease ( PD ) are distinct neurological disorders , previous studies have indicated that as many as 25 percent of patients with AD develop PD-like symptoms , and some PD patients develop signs of AD as well.It 's pretty normal to lose your mind as you get old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD) are distinct neurological disorders, previous studies have indicated that as many as 25 percent of patients with AD develop PD-like symptoms, and some PD patients develop signs of AD as well.It's pretty normal to lose your mind as you get old.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037400</id>
	<title>Skepticism may be warranted, here.</title>
	<author>dintlu</author>
	<datestamp>1257757920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They say the first thing you hear about research or technology is the best thing you will ever hear about it.</p><p>I'm not so sure "neutralizing" this kinase-C will result in any miracle cures, as the protein happens to have a lot of other uses in the body, per wikipedia:</p><p>"Recurring themes are that PKC is involved in receptor desensitization, in modulating membrane structure events, in regulating transcription, in mediating immune responses, in regulating cell growth, and in learning and memory"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They say the first thing you hear about research or technology is the best thing you will ever hear about it.I 'm not so sure " neutralizing " this kinase-C will result in any miracle cures , as the protein happens to have a lot of other uses in the body , per wikipedia : " Recurring themes are that PKC is involved in receptor desensitization , in modulating membrane structure events , in regulating transcription , in mediating immune responses , in regulating cell growth , and in learning and memory "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They say the first thing you hear about research or technology is the best thing you will ever hear about it.I'm not so sure "neutralizing" this kinase-C will result in any miracle cures, as the protein happens to have a lot of other uses in the body, per wikipedia:"Recurring themes are that PKC is involved in receptor desensitization, in modulating membrane structure events, in regulating transcription, in mediating immune responses, in regulating cell growth, and in learning and memory"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037900</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257759900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're at least comparing apples, oranges, and pears here.</p><p>The current meds can help alleviate the symptoms of the disease, but do nothing to arrest it's progress. Eventually, the disease progresses until the drugs cannot help anymore.</p><p>Various transplants aim to reverse the progression of the disease significantly. If it works, it's like starting over, but you still have a progressive degenerative disease and if you live long enough, you'll need another transplant.</p><p>TFA is talking about a drug that would halt the progress of the disease right where it is. Whatever your level of function is, that's where it will stay using only this theoretical new drug. Presumably, you would then use other methods to either reverse the progress (knowing it won't progress again) or to alleviate the symptoms.</p><p>Yes, it's quite speculative, but IF it pans out, it could be a major improvement in the lives of Parkinson's sufferers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're at least comparing apples , oranges , and pears here.The current meds can help alleviate the symptoms of the disease , but do nothing to arrest it 's progress .
Eventually , the disease progresses until the drugs can not help anymore.Various transplants aim to reverse the progression of the disease significantly .
If it works , it 's like starting over , but you still have a progressive degenerative disease and if you live long enough , you 'll need another transplant.TFA is talking about a drug that would halt the progress of the disease right where it is .
Whatever your level of function is , that 's where it will stay using only this theoretical new drug .
Presumably , you would then use other methods to either reverse the progress ( knowing it wo n't progress again ) or to alleviate the symptoms.Yes , it 's quite speculative , but IF it pans out , it could be a major improvement in the lives of Parkinson 's sufferers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're at least comparing apples, oranges, and pears here.The current meds can help alleviate the symptoms of the disease, but do nothing to arrest it's progress.
Eventually, the disease progresses until the drugs cannot help anymore.Various transplants aim to reverse the progression of the disease significantly.
If it works, it's like starting over, but you still have a progressive degenerative disease and if you live long enough, you'll need another transplant.TFA is talking about a drug that would halt the progress of the disease right where it is.
Whatever your level of function is, that's where it will stay using only this theoretical new drug.
Presumably, you would then use other methods to either reverse the progress (knowing it won't progress again) or to alleviate the symptoms.Yes, it's quite speculative, but IF it pans out, it could be a major improvement in the lives of Parkinson's sufferers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038262</id>
	<title>Re:How do they calculate the time needed</title>
	<author>jbeaupre</author>
	<datestamp>1257761460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This might explain why: <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/drugs/2006-08-23-drug-lawsuits-usat\_x.htm" title="usatoday.com">http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/drugs/2006-08-23-drug-lawsuits-usat\_x.htm</a> [usatoday.com]

<br> <br>Willing to risk the entire company by taking a few shortcuts?  Ethically you might say it's worth it.  Better for a company to risk death than a person.  But that's not how things are decided.  Both have to live.  And that takes a lot of time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This might explain why : http : //www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/drugs/2006-08-23-drug-lawsuits-usat \ _x.htm [ usatoday.com ] Willing to risk the entire company by taking a few shortcuts ?
Ethically you might say it 's worth it .
Better for a company to risk death than a person .
But that 's not how things are decided .
Both have to live .
And that takes a lot of time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This might explain why: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/drugs/2006-08-23-drug-lawsuits-usat\_x.htm [usatoday.com]

 Willing to risk the entire company by taking a few shortcuts?
Ethically you might say it's worth it.
Better for a company to risk death than a person.
But that's not how things are decided.
Both have to live.
And that takes a lot of time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037890</id>
	<title>Re:Skepticism may be warranted, here.</title>
	<author>OG</author>
	<datestamp>1257759840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are many different forms of PKC, including PKC delta, the one that seems to be in question here according to recent publications from this lab.  Specifically, a caspase enzyme is cleaving PKC delta into a smaller protein, and it's this cleaved version that appears to be causing the damage to the dopamine neurons in the nigra.  Caspases mediate programmed cell death, and the compound in the paper I looked at blocks a certain caspase that was activated by the presence of certain metals.</p><p>So while PKC and caspases are found widely throughout the body, there's actually a fair degree of specificity in the current model.  Of course it's still early, and there are things to worry about, such as a possible increased likelihood for cancer (caspase 3 may be involved in breast cancer).  But if this particular interaction between capase 3 and PKC delta can be successfully blocked without harm to other systems, we may have a good treatment on our hands.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are many different forms of PKC , including PKC delta , the one that seems to be in question here according to recent publications from this lab .
Specifically , a caspase enzyme is cleaving PKC delta into a smaller protein , and it 's this cleaved version that appears to be causing the damage to the dopamine neurons in the nigra .
Caspases mediate programmed cell death , and the compound in the paper I looked at blocks a certain caspase that was activated by the presence of certain metals.So while PKC and caspases are found widely throughout the body , there 's actually a fair degree of specificity in the current model .
Of course it 's still early , and there are things to worry about , such as a possible increased likelihood for cancer ( caspase 3 may be involved in breast cancer ) .
But if this particular interaction between capase 3 and PKC delta can be successfully blocked without harm to other systems , we may have a good treatment on our hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are many different forms of PKC, including PKC delta, the one that seems to be in question here according to recent publications from this lab.
Specifically, a caspase enzyme is cleaving PKC delta into a smaller protein, and it's this cleaved version that appears to be causing the damage to the dopamine neurons in the nigra.
Caspases mediate programmed cell death, and the compound in the paper I looked at blocks a certain caspase that was activated by the presence of certain metals.So while PKC and caspases are found widely throughout the body, there's actually a fair degree of specificity in the current model.
Of course it's still early, and there are things to worry about, such as a possible increased likelihood for cancer (caspase 3 may be involved in breast cancer).
But if this particular interaction between capase 3 and PKC delta can be successfully blocked without harm to other systems, we may have a good treatment on our hands.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038128</id>
	<title>Re:Skepticism may be warranted, here.</title>
	<author>reverseengineer</author>
	<datestamp>1257760860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Protein kinase C" is really at least 10 different proteins in humans- "isozymes" that have similar function, but different structures and different regulation mechanisms.  All of the protein kinaseC variant belong to the larger class of serine/threonine kinases (about 100 different enzymes), and all the work that any of those enzymes do is to add a phosphate group to a serine or threonine amino acid on a protein.  That role is important because protein phosphorylation is used as a molecular switch to activate or deactivate a protein.  There's nothing special about this particular protein kinase-C isozyme, other than the target it phosphorylates.
<br> <br>
Presumably, the target of this particular kinase C form is involved in the apoptosis pathway for dopamine-releasing neurons, so keeping the molecular switch from being turned on could prevent the cell death from being carried out.  Since the structures of isozymes are different, you could develop a drug that knocks out this variant of PKC without turning off PKC globally.
<br> <br>
However, preventing apoptosis of neurons, while possibly leading to an effective treatment, still does not address why brain cells would feel the need to kill themselves.  For instance, in at least some Parkinson's patients, neurons suffer from a buildup of improperly folded protein called alpha-synuclein (compare amyloid and tau in Alzheimer's, prions in prion diseases).  (However, overall there are many possible causes of Parkinson's and related syndromes, including unknown causes.) Cell suicide is meant as a protective measure for the remaining cells so they are not in turn poisoned by the output of misfolded proteins.  What happens when you turn off apoptosis, and cells which turn "sick" are no longer able to die?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Protein kinase C " is really at least 10 different proteins in humans- " isozymes " that have similar function , but different structures and different regulation mechanisms .
All of the protein kinaseC variant belong to the larger class of serine/threonine kinases ( about 100 different enzymes ) , and all the work that any of those enzymes do is to add a phosphate group to a serine or threonine amino acid on a protein .
That role is important because protein phosphorylation is used as a molecular switch to activate or deactivate a protein .
There 's nothing special about this particular protein kinase-C isozyme , other than the target it phosphorylates .
Presumably , the target of this particular kinase C form is involved in the apoptosis pathway for dopamine-releasing neurons , so keeping the molecular switch from being turned on could prevent the cell death from being carried out .
Since the structures of isozymes are different , you could develop a drug that knocks out this variant of PKC without turning off PKC globally .
However , preventing apoptosis of neurons , while possibly leading to an effective treatment , still does not address why brain cells would feel the need to kill themselves .
For instance , in at least some Parkinson 's patients , neurons suffer from a buildup of improperly folded protein called alpha-synuclein ( compare amyloid and tau in Alzheimer 's , prions in prion diseases ) .
( However , overall there are many possible causes of Parkinson 's and related syndromes , including unknown causes .
) Cell suicide is meant as a protective measure for the remaining cells so they are not in turn poisoned by the output of misfolded proteins .
What happens when you turn off apoptosis , and cells which turn " sick " are no longer able to die ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Protein kinase C" is really at least 10 different proteins in humans- "isozymes" that have similar function, but different structures and different regulation mechanisms.
All of the protein kinaseC variant belong to the larger class of serine/threonine kinases (about 100 different enzymes), and all the work that any of those enzymes do is to add a phosphate group to a serine or threonine amino acid on a protein.
That role is important because protein phosphorylation is used as a molecular switch to activate or deactivate a protein.
There's nothing special about this particular protein kinase-C isozyme, other than the target it phosphorylates.
Presumably, the target of this particular kinase C form is involved in the apoptosis pathway for dopamine-releasing neurons, so keeping the molecular switch from being turned on could prevent the cell death from being carried out.
Since the structures of isozymes are different, you could develop a drug that knocks out this variant of PKC without turning off PKC globally.
However, preventing apoptosis of neurons, while possibly leading to an effective treatment, still does not address why brain cells would feel the need to kill themselves.
For instance, in at least some Parkinson's patients, neurons suffer from a buildup of improperly folded protein called alpha-synuclein (compare amyloid and tau in Alzheimer's, prions in prion diseases).
(However, overall there are many possible causes of Parkinson's and related syndromes, including unknown causes.
) Cell suicide is meant as a protective measure for the remaining cells so they are not in turn poisoned by the output of misfolded proteins.
What happens when you turn off apoptosis, and cells which turn "sick" are no longer able to die?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037946</id>
	<title>Cure, eh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257760140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have we seen any real cures via treatments lately? I honestly don't know, but there sure are a lot of maintenance-level medications out there. Is there a treatment or a pill out there that can just cure you flat out, when your body wouldn't do so on its own?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have we seen any real cures via treatments lately ?
I honestly do n't know , but there sure are a lot of maintenance-level medications out there .
Is there a treatment or a pill out there that can just cure you flat out , when your body would n't do so on its own ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have we seen any real cures via treatments lately?
I honestly don't know, but there sure are a lot of maintenance-level medications out there.
Is there a treatment or a pill out there that can just cure you flat out, when your body wouldn't do so on its own?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038216</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1257761280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective? If the cure kills 5\% of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a "perfect" cure out of the lab and through FDA testing.</p></div><p>Unfortunately, if you give that treatment to everyone, after 5\% die, you'll have no one left to experiment on to find an even newer cure that kills no one.  Or even worse, you'll find out that half the dosage of the same stuff, cures them just as well without killing anyone at all.</p><p>Also the hypothesis is always that its a cure, because that is better for research grants.  Of course, if you give it to everyone in an uncontrolled manner, if it doesn't work, which would not be entirely surprising, then ten years later when 100\% die, you have to start all over again, except you've wasted ten years.</p><p>And then too, bad money always pushes out good money if the purchasers are ignorant, and all customers of medical treatment are ignorant, so no free medical market can exist, so....  A scammer could make a lot of dough, for awhile, by pushing something that doesn't work but is marketed well, look at the supplement and diet industries for example.  So you need a system that prevents intentional failures from being marketed, otherwise we'd end up with only scams, because dreaming up scams is cheaper than real research.  So to save everyone else from some totally different scam, we have to prove this real treatment isn't a scam, even if it takes awhile.  And its only fair, since if we didn't prevent other scams in the past, this guy would never have gotten research money to find a real treatment, since it would have been more profitable to invest in a scam.</p><p>Thus the policy of careful testing, in the long run, is more humane, even if in the short run it looks bad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective ?
If the cure kills 5 \ % of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a " perfect " cure out of the lab and through FDA testing.Unfortunately , if you give that treatment to everyone , after 5 \ % die , you 'll have no one left to experiment on to find an even newer cure that kills no one .
Or even worse , you 'll find out that half the dosage of the same stuff , cures them just as well without killing anyone at all.Also the hypothesis is always that its a cure , because that is better for research grants .
Of course , if you give it to everyone in an uncontrolled manner , if it does n't work , which would not be entirely surprising , then ten years later when 100 \ % die , you have to start all over again , except you 've wasted ten years.And then too , bad money always pushes out good money if the purchasers are ignorant , and all customers of medical treatment are ignorant , so no free medical market can exist , so.... A scammer could make a lot of dough , for awhile , by pushing something that does n't work but is marketed well , look at the supplement and diet industries for example .
So you need a system that prevents intentional failures from being marketed , otherwise we 'd end up with only scams , because dreaming up scams is cheaper than real research .
So to save everyone else from some totally different scam , we have to prove this real treatment is n't a scam , even if it takes awhile .
And its only fair , since if we did n't prevent other scams in the past , this guy would never have gotten research money to find a real treatment , since it would have been more profitable to invest in a scam.Thus the policy of careful testing , in the long run , is more humane , even if in the short run it looks bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective?
If the cure kills 5\% of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a "perfect" cure out of the lab and through FDA testing.Unfortunately, if you give that treatment to everyone, after 5\% die, you'll have no one left to experiment on to find an even newer cure that kills no one.
Or even worse, you'll find out that half the dosage of the same stuff, cures them just as well without killing anyone at all.Also the hypothesis is always that its a cure, because that is better for research grants.
Of course, if you give it to everyone in an uncontrolled manner, if it doesn't work, which would not be entirely surprising, then ten years later when 100\% die, you have to start all over again, except you've wasted ten years.And then too, bad money always pushes out good money if the purchasers are ignorant, and all customers of medical treatment are ignorant, so no free medical market can exist, so....  A scammer could make a lot of dough, for awhile, by pushing something that doesn't work but is marketed well, look at the supplement and diet industries for example.
So you need a system that prevents intentional failures from being marketed, otherwise we'd end up with only scams, because dreaming up scams is cheaper than real research.
So to save everyone else from some totally different scam, we have to prove this real treatment isn't a scam, even if it takes awhile.
And its only fair, since if we didn't prevent other scams in the past, this guy would never have gotten research money to find a real treatment, since it would have been more profitable to invest in a scam.Thus the policy of careful testing, in the long run, is more humane, even if in the short run it looks bad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30057606</id>
	<title>Re:I don't know</title>
	<author>physburn</author>
	<datestamp>1257068580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its was shaky but stiffened up nice at the end. Serious
Parkinson's diease is a killer, one of the slow degenerative
ones, that destroys the brain of it victim so any hope for
a cure is good. Ten years is to long.
<p>
---
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/blogs/Drug\%20Discovery/feed.html" title="feeddistiller.com">Drug Discovery</a> [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ <a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/" title="feeddistiller.com">Feed Distiller</a> [feeddistiller.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its was shaky but stiffened up nice at the end .
Serious Parkinson 's diease is a killer , one of the slow degenerative ones , that destroys the brain of it victim so any hope for a cure is good .
Ten years is to long .
--- Drug Discovery [ feeddistiller.com ] Feed @ Feed Distiller [ feeddistiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its was shaky but stiffened up nice at the end.
Serious
Parkinson's diease is a killer, one of the slow degenerative
ones, that destroys the brain of it victim so any hope for
a cure is good.
Ten years is to long.
---

Drug Discovery [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039474</id>
	<title>Press release long on hype, short on substance!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257766680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't fathom what this article is doing here.<br> <br>

First, it links to a blog, that reprints the text of Iowa State University's over-hyped press release. If Slashdot it going to print hype, why not link directly to the source?<br> <br>
Second, the supposedly new compound discovered by Dr. Kathasamy that neutralizes PKC-delta is never named in the press release at all.<br> <br>
Third, no published research is cited in the press release.<br> <br>
Fourth, a Pubmed.gov search for Dr. Kathasamy's work finds articles on the dopamine killing protein PKC-delta dating back to the year 2003, and referencing research done on the neurotoxic effects of this protein dating back to the early 1990's.<br> <br>
Fifth, Dr. Kathasamy's articles published in 2003 and 2007 described results in cell cultures, and in animals, not in humans. Although he reported interesting results in those early studies, any clinical application of that work is merely conjecture at this point, and certainly years off in the future, if it ever materializes at all.<br> <br>
Sixth, those same articles include references to other promising results to block the neurotoxic effect of PKC-delta and its role in Parkinson's disease, which were obtained by other researchers in 1999, using a natural supplement, creatine, which was already being studied in clinical trials in human subjects. The studies with creatine, and also Co-Q10, which have been repeated by many researchers around the world have shown consistently good results, and also long-term safety. So why don't they tell us exactly what it is that is so special about Dr. Kathasamy's work to justify such hype?<br> <br>

All of which makes me want to know why Iowa State University issued the press release last week in the first place? Where is the alleged breakthrough? Why are they hyping something that is so far away from any possible clinical application? Why did they provide no details about the purported "key to possibly cure Parkinson's disease? What is this all really about?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't fathom what this article is doing here .
First , it links to a blog , that reprints the text of Iowa State University 's over-hyped press release .
If Slashdot it going to print hype , why not link directly to the source ?
Second , the supposedly new compound discovered by Dr. Kathasamy that neutralizes PKC-delta is never named in the press release at all .
Third , no published research is cited in the press release .
Fourth , a Pubmed.gov search for Dr. Kathasamy 's work finds articles on the dopamine killing protein PKC-delta dating back to the year 2003 , and referencing research done on the neurotoxic effects of this protein dating back to the early 1990 's .
Fifth , Dr. Kathasamy 's articles published in 2003 and 2007 described results in cell cultures , and in animals , not in humans .
Although he reported interesting results in those early studies , any clinical application of that work is merely conjecture at this point , and certainly years off in the future , if it ever materializes at all .
Sixth , those same articles include references to other promising results to block the neurotoxic effect of PKC-delta and its role in Parkinson 's disease , which were obtained by other researchers in 1999 , using a natural supplement , creatine , which was already being studied in clinical trials in human subjects .
The studies with creatine , and also Co-Q10 , which have been repeated by many researchers around the world have shown consistently good results , and also long-term safety .
So why do n't they tell us exactly what it is that is so special about Dr. Kathasamy 's work to justify such hype ?
All of which makes me want to know why Iowa State University issued the press release last week in the first place ?
Where is the alleged breakthrough ?
Why are they hyping something that is so far away from any possible clinical application ?
Why did they provide no details about the purported " key to possibly cure Parkinson 's disease ?
What is this all really about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't fathom what this article is doing here.
First, it links to a blog, that reprints the text of Iowa State University's over-hyped press release.
If Slashdot it going to print hype, why not link directly to the source?
Second, the supposedly new compound discovered by Dr. Kathasamy that neutralizes PKC-delta is never named in the press release at all.
Third, no published research is cited in the press release.
Fourth, a Pubmed.gov search for Dr. Kathasamy's work finds articles on the dopamine killing protein PKC-delta dating back to the year 2003, and referencing research done on the neurotoxic effects of this protein dating back to the early 1990's.
Fifth, Dr. Kathasamy's articles published in 2003 and 2007 described results in cell cultures, and in animals, not in humans.
Although he reported interesting results in those early studies, any clinical application of that work is merely conjecture at this point, and certainly years off in the future, if it ever materializes at all.
Sixth, those same articles include references to other promising results to block the neurotoxic effect of PKC-delta and its role in Parkinson's disease, which were obtained by other researchers in 1999, using a natural supplement, creatine, which was already being studied in clinical trials in human subjects.
The studies with creatine, and also Co-Q10, which have been repeated by many researchers around the world have shown consistently good results, and also long-term safety.
So why don't they tell us exactly what it is that is so special about Dr. Kathasamy's work to justify such hype?
All of which makes me want to know why Iowa State University issued the press release last week in the first place?
Where is the alleged breakthrough?
Why are they hyping something that is so far away from any possible clinical application?
Why did they provide no details about the purported "key to possibly cure Parkinson's disease?
What is this all really about?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040478</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257772020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>Then they have to find something (a drug or other treatment modality) that alters enzyme function that can get into brain (not easy) and not trash everything else in sight and / or <i>create more problems than it solves</i>.In this case, the bar is going to be set fairly high.<br>
&nbsp; </p></div><div><p>Create more problems than it solves? If it doesn't work they die anyway... what's the risk?</p></div></blockquote></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then they have to find something ( a drug or other treatment modality ) that alters enzyme function that can get into brain ( not easy ) and not trash everything else in sight and / or create more problems than it solves.In this case , the bar is going to be set fairly high .
  Create more problems than it solves ?
If it does n't work they die anyway... what 's the risk ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then they have to find something (a drug or other treatment modality) that alters enzyme function that can get into brain (not easy) and not trash everything else in sight and / or create more problems than it solves.In this case, the bar is going to be set fairly high.
  Create more problems than it solves?
If it doesn't work they die anyway... what's the risk?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037806</id>
	<title>Re:I don't know</title>
	<author>tool462</author>
	<datestamp>1257759480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The insensitivity of this joke made me shudder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The insensitivity of this joke made me shudder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The insensitivity of this joke made me shudder.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042022</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257784800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not necessarily that bad.  The substantia nigra is part of a feedback error correction system (the extended basal ganglia), so it may well be possible to regrow functional connections as an adult.  And while yes, any general PKC blocker is going to be fairly dirty, it might be possible to find an antagonist specific to the subtype involved in this pathway (whatever it is, I didn't see enough detail there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I'm assuming some sort of signal transduction pathway specific to dopamine receptors).</p><p>Even if you can't, from what I understand, part of the etiology of PD is free radical damage (dopamine is a fairly reactive chemical) so reducing PKC activity just a little bit may be enough to stop the progression of the disease without adversely affecting everything else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not necessarily that bad .
The substantia nigra is part of a feedback error correction system ( the extended basal ganglia ) , so it may well be possible to regrow functional connections as an adult .
And while yes , any general PKC blocker is going to be fairly dirty , it might be possible to find an antagonist specific to the subtype involved in this pathway ( whatever it is , I did n't see enough detail there ... I 'm assuming some sort of signal transduction pathway specific to dopamine receptors ) .Even if you ca n't , from what I understand , part of the etiology of PD is free radical damage ( dopamine is a fairly reactive chemical ) so reducing PKC activity just a little bit may be enough to stop the progression of the disease without adversely affecting everything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not necessarily that bad.
The substantia nigra is part of a feedback error correction system (the extended basal ganglia), so it may well be possible to regrow functional connections as an adult.
And while yes, any general PKC blocker is going to be fairly dirty, it might be possible to find an antagonist specific to the subtype involved in this pathway (whatever it is, I didn't see enough detail there ... I'm assuming some sort of signal transduction pathway specific to dopamine receptors).Even if you can't, from what I understand, part of the etiology of PD is free radical damage (dopamine is a fairly reactive chemical) so reducing PKC activity just a little bit may be enough to stop the progression of the disease without adversely affecting everything else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038902</id>
	<title>Re:Cure, eh?</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1257764040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know your intentions, but you seem to be insenuating a shift in the approach medicne is taking.  I'd say there's not really a change.</p><p>Big breakthroughs in early medicne were things like antibiotics.  Because the diseases they treat are caused by bacteria, and because you can eliminate all of the bacteria causing a given illness, cure is a reasonable goal.</p><p>Viral or fungal infections, or cancers, are similarly things where it makes sense to hope for a cure.  Any condition that's caused by somethign attacking your otherwise-functional body might potentially be cured.</p><p>But as our lives get longer, and the number of deaths attributed to bacteria, etc. decrease, more and more of the conditions that have our attention are caused by some abnormal function of the body itself.  The body is a complex and dynamic place; it's a bit much to hope that acute administration of a chemical will forever alter whatever defect is causing a problem.  Suppose, for example, that the cause is ultimately genetic; then every cell is propagating the root cause.  If you can interfere with the operation of the disease so as to eliminate - or sometimes even just reduce - symptoms, that's a great result; but it probably does mean you'll be on a maintenance medicine.</p><p>Modern medicine is still looking for cures, but the problems we're facing are a lot harder now that the lowest-hanging fruit has been taken.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know your intentions , but you seem to be insenuating a shift in the approach medicne is taking .
I 'd say there 's not really a change.Big breakthroughs in early medicne were things like antibiotics .
Because the diseases they treat are caused by bacteria , and because you can eliminate all of the bacteria causing a given illness , cure is a reasonable goal.Viral or fungal infections , or cancers , are similarly things where it makes sense to hope for a cure .
Any condition that 's caused by somethign attacking your otherwise-functional body might potentially be cured.But as our lives get longer , and the number of deaths attributed to bacteria , etc .
decrease , more and more of the conditions that have our attention are caused by some abnormal function of the body itself .
The body is a complex and dynamic place ; it 's a bit much to hope that acute administration of a chemical will forever alter whatever defect is causing a problem .
Suppose , for example , that the cause is ultimately genetic ; then every cell is propagating the root cause .
If you can interfere with the operation of the disease so as to eliminate - or sometimes even just reduce - symptoms , that 's a great result ; but it probably does mean you 'll be on a maintenance medicine.Modern medicine is still looking for cures , but the problems we 're facing are a lot harder now that the lowest-hanging fruit has been taken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know your intentions, but you seem to be insenuating a shift in the approach medicne is taking.
I'd say there's not really a change.Big breakthroughs in early medicne were things like antibiotics.
Because the diseases they treat are caused by bacteria, and because you can eliminate all of the bacteria causing a given illness, cure is a reasonable goal.Viral or fungal infections, or cancers, are similarly things where it makes sense to hope for a cure.
Any condition that's caused by somethign attacking your otherwise-functional body might potentially be cured.But as our lives get longer, and the number of deaths attributed to bacteria, etc.
decrease, more and more of the conditions that have our attention are caused by some abnormal function of the body itself.
The body is a complex and dynamic place; it's a bit much to hope that acute administration of a chemical will forever alter whatever defect is causing a problem.
Suppose, for example, that the cause is ultimately genetic; then every cell is propagating the root cause.
If you can interfere with the operation of the disease so as to eliminate - or sometimes even just reduce - symptoms, that's a great result; but it probably does mean you'll be on a maintenance medicine.Modern medicine is still looking for cures, but the problems we're facing are a lot harder now that the lowest-hanging fruit has been taken.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30043140</id>
	<title>Re:huh?</title>
	<author>jenik</author>
	<datestamp>1257886140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Protein kinase C is one of the most important intracellular signalling enzymes. If you block it in the whole organism you die pretty quickly. I.e. the trick is in blocking it selectively only in dopaminergic neurons. Let's say it's not trivial.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Protein kinase C is one of the most important intracellular signalling enzymes .
If you block it in the whole organism you die pretty quickly .
I.e. the trick is in blocking it selectively only in dopaminergic neurons .
Let 's say it 's not trivial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Protein kinase C is one of the most important intracellular signalling enzymes.
If you block it in the whole organism you die pretty quickly.
I.e. the trick is in blocking it selectively only in dopaminergic neurons.
Let's say it's not trivial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037334</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370</id>
	<title>Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>afidel</author>
	<datestamp>1257757800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective? If the cure kills 5\% of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a "perfect" cure out of the lab and through FDA testing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective ?
If the cure kills 5 \ % of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a " perfect " cure out of the lab and through FDA testing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective?
If the cure kills 5\% of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a "perfect" cure out of the lab and through FDA testing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038512</id>
	<title>Here's the abstract:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257762420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This research is a bottom-up approach, working to understand the details of the disease and then develop a cure at the most fundamental level possible. This is why this group doesn't have a treatment out there yet- he's not trying to treat the symptoms, he seems to be doing a very thorough job of dissecting the problem (at least based on the abstract from his latest paper).<br>Here's the abstract (abstracts are public domain):<br>Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2009 Oct 15;240(2):273-85. Epub 2009 Jul 29.<br>Vanadium induces dopaminergic neurotoxicity via protein kinase Cdelta dependent oxidative signaling mechanisms: relevance to etiopathogenesis of Parkinson's disease.<br>Afeseh Ngwa H, Kanthasamy A, Anantharam V, Song C, Witte T, Houk R, Kanthasamy AG.</p><p>Environmental exposure to neurotoxic metals through various sources including exposure to welding fumes has been linked to an increased incidence of Parkinson's disease (PD). Welding fumes contain many different metals including vanadium typically present as particulates containing vanadium pentoxide (V2O5). However, possible neurotoxic effects of this metal oxide on dopaminergic neuronal cells are not well studied. In the present study, we characterized vanadium-induced oxidative stress-dependent cellular events in cell culture models of PD. V2O5 was neurotoxic to dopaminergic neuronal cells including primary nigral dopaminergic neurons and the EC50 was determined to be 37 microM in N27 dopaminergic neuronal cell model. The neurotoxic effect was accompanied by a time-dependent uptake of vanadium and upregulation of metal transporter proteins Tf and DMT1 in N27 cells. Additionally, vanadium resulted in a threefold increase in reactive oxygen species generation, followed by release of mitochondrial cytochrome c into cytoplasm and subsequent activation of caspase-9 (&gt;fourfold) and caspase-3 (&gt;ninefold). Interestingly, vanadium exposure induced proteolytic cleavage of native protein kinase Cdelta (PKCdelta, 72-74 kDa) to yield a 41 kDa catalytically active fragment resulting in a persistent increase in PKCdelta kinase activity. Co-treatment with pan-caspase inhibitor Z-VAD-FMK significantly blocked vanadium-induced PKCdelta proteolytic activation, indicating that caspases mediate PKCdelta cleavage. Also, co-treatment with Z-VAD-FMK almost completely inhibited V2O5-induced DNA fragmentation. Furthermore, PKCdelta knockdown using siRNA protected N27 cells from V2O5-induced apoptotic cell death. Collectively, these results demonstrate that vanadium can exert neurotoxic effects in dopaminergic neuronal cells via caspase-3-dependent PKCdelta cleavage, suggesting that metal exposure may promote nigral dopaminergic degeneration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This research is a bottom-up approach , working to understand the details of the disease and then develop a cure at the most fundamental level possible .
This is why this group does n't have a treatment out there yet- he 's not trying to treat the symptoms , he seems to be doing a very thorough job of dissecting the problem ( at least based on the abstract from his latest paper ) .Here 's the abstract ( abstracts are public domain ) : Toxicol Appl Pharmacol .
2009 Oct 15 ; 240 ( 2 ) : 273-85 .
Epub 2009 Jul 29.Vanadium induces dopaminergic neurotoxicity via protein kinase Cdelta dependent oxidative signaling mechanisms : relevance to etiopathogenesis of Parkinson 's disease.Afeseh Ngwa H , Kanthasamy A , Anantharam V , Song C , Witte T , Houk R , Kanthasamy AG.Environmental exposure to neurotoxic metals through various sources including exposure to welding fumes has been linked to an increased incidence of Parkinson 's disease ( PD ) .
Welding fumes contain many different metals including vanadium typically present as particulates containing vanadium pentoxide ( V2O5 ) .
However , possible neurotoxic effects of this metal oxide on dopaminergic neuronal cells are not well studied .
In the present study , we characterized vanadium-induced oxidative stress-dependent cellular events in cell culture models of PD .
V2O5 was neurotoxic to dopaminergic neuronal cells including primary nigral dopaminergic neurons and the EC50 was determined to be 37 microM in N27 dopaminergic neuronal cell model .
The neurotoxic effect was accompanied by a time-dependent uptake of vanadium and upregulation of metal transporter proteins Tf and DMT1 in N27 cells .
Additionally , vanadium resulted in a threefold increase in reactive oxygen species generation , followed by release of mitochondrial cytochrome c into cytoplasm and subsequent activation of caspase-9 ( &gt; fourfold ) and caspase-3 ( &gt; ninefold ) .
Interestingly , vanadium exposure induced proteolytic cleavage of native protein kinase Cdelta ( PKCdelta , 72-74 kDa ) to yield a 41 kDa catalytically active fragment resulting in a persistent increase in PKCdelta kinase activity .
Co-treatment with pan-caspase inhibitor Z-VAD-FMK significantly blocked vanadium-induced PKCdelta proteolytic activation , indicating that caspases mediate PKCdelta cleavage .
Also , co-treatment with Z-VAD-FMK almost completely inhibited V2O5-induced DNA fragmentation .
Furthermore , PKCdelta knockdown using siRNA protected N27 cells from V2O5-induced apoptotic cell death .
Collectively , these results demonstrate that vanadium can exert neurotoxic effects in dopaminergic neuronal cells via caspase-3-dependent PKCdelta cleavage , suggesting that metal exposure may promote nigral dopaminergic degeneration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This research is a bottom-up approach, working to understand the details of the disease and then develop a cure at the most fundamental level possible.
This is why this group doesn't have a treatment out there yet- he's not trying to treat the symptoms, he seems to be doing a very thorough job of dissecting the problem (at least based on the abstract from his latest paper).Here's the abstract (abstracts are public domain):Toxicol Appl Pharmacol.
2009 Oct 15;240(2):273-85.
Epub 2009 Jul 29.Vanadium induces dopaminergic neurotoxicity via protein kinase Cdelta dependent oxidative signaling mechanisms: relevance to etiopathogenesis of Parkinson's disease.Afeseh Ngwa H, Kanthasamy A, Anantharam V, Song C, Witte T, Houk R, Kanthasamy AG.Environmental exposure to neurotoxic metals through various sources including exposure to welding fumes has been linked to an increased incidence of Parkinson's disease (PD).
Welding fumes contain many different metals including vanadium typically present as particulates containing vanadium pentoxide (V2O5).
However, possible neurotoxic effects of this metal oxide on dopaminergic neuronal cells are not well studied.
In the present study, we characterized vanadium-induced oxidative stress-dependent cellular events in cell culture models of PD.
V2O5 was neurotoxic to dopaminergic neuronal cells including primary nigral dopaminergic neurons and the EC50 was determined to be 37 microM in N27 dopaminergic neuronal cell model.
The neurotoxic effect was accompanied by a time-dependent uptake of vanadium and upregulation of metal transporter proteins Tf and DMT1 in N27 cells.
Additionally, vanadium resulted in a threefold increase in reactive oxygen species generation, followed by release of mitochondrial cytochrome c into cytoplasm and subsequent activation of caspase-9 (&gt;fourfold) and caspase-3 (&gt;ninefold).
Interestingly, vanadium exposure induced proteolytic cleavage of native protein kinase Cdelta (PKCdelta, 72-74 kDa) to yield a 41 kDa catalytically active fragment resulting in a persistent increase in PKCdelta kinase activity.
Co-treatment with pan-caspase inhibitor Z-VAD-FMK significantly blocked vanadium-induced PKCdelta proteolytic activation, indicating that caspases mediate PKCdelta cleavage.
Also, co-treatment with Z-VAD-FMK almost completely inhibited V2O5-induced DNA fragmentation.
Furthermore, PKCdelta knockdown using siRNA protected N27 cells from V2O5-induced apoptotic cell death.
Collectively, these results demonstrate that vanadium can exert neurotoxic effects in dopaminergic neuronal cells via caspase-3-dependent PKCdelta cleavage, suggesting that metal exposure may promote nigral dopaminergic degeneration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038106</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>Caged</author>
	<datestamp>1257760800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Be aware that this cure won't reverse degeneration that has already occured.</p><p>It will merely hault the progression of Parkinson's so that those in the future diganosed with this illness do not have to fear a slow, lingering decrease in their ability to function in society.</p><p>Sadly, this news is 20 years too late to help my father.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Be aware that this cure wo n't reverse degeneration that has already occured.It will merely hault the progression of Parkinson 's so that those in the future diganosed with this illness do not have to fear a slow , lingering decrease in their ability to function in society.Sadly , this news is 20 years too late to help my father .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be aware that this cure won't reverse degeneration that has already occured.It will merely hault the progression of Parkinson's so that those in the future diganosed with this illness do not have to fear a slow, lingering decrease in their ability to function in society.Sadly, this news is 20 years too late to help my father.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040026</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257769800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Protein Kinase C is a key enzyme activated by many very different pathways involved in many different functions across the board.  Blocking it will affect innumerable systems.<br> <br>

Saying Protein Kinase C is the key to neutralizing Parkinson's Diseases is like saying Money is the key to the Financial Crisis.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Duh.  <br> <br>

The clinical effects of Parkinson's Disease are the result of neuron death.  You can't reverse the effects.  Even if you induce neuronal growth, the brain will have to relearn the connections it needs to make, which took a lifetime to form.  Forget about playing the piano again.  You'll have to relearn to play (although you'll still have the conceptual knowledge).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Protein Kinase C is a key enzyme activated by many very different pathways involved in many different functions across the board .
Blocking it will affect innumerable systems .
Saying Protein Kinase C is the key to neutralizing Parkinson 's Diseases is like saying Money is the key to the Financial Crisis .
... Duh .
The clinical effects of Parkinson 's Disease are the result of neuron death .
You ca n't reverse the effects .
Even if you induce neuronal growth , the brain will have to relearn the connections it needs to make , which took a lifetime to form .
Forget about playing the piano again .
You 'll have to relearn to play ( although you 'll still have the conceptual knowledge ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Protein Kinase C is a key enzyme activated by many very different pathways involved in many different functions across the board.
Blocking it will affect innumerable systems.
Saying Protein Kinase C is the key to neutralizing Parkinson's Diseases is like saying Money is the key to the Financial Crisis.
... Duh.
The clinical effects of Parkinson's Disease are the result of neuron death.
You can't reverse the effects.
Even if you induce neuronal growth, the brain will have to relearn the connections it needs to make, which took a lifetime to form.
Forget about playing the piano again.
You'll have to relearn to play (although you'll still have the conceptual knowledge).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037884</id>
	<title>Research Completely Wrong</title>
	<author>frankxcid</author>
	<datestamp>1257759840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>These scientists are completely off their rockers.  Don't they know that it is embryonic stem cells and the defeat of Bush that is the real cure for Parkinsons.  Thank you Michael J Fox!</htmltext>
<tokenext>These scientists are completely off their rockers .
Do n't they know that it is embryonic stem cells and the defeat of Bush that is the real cure for Parkinsons .
Thank you Michael J Fox !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These scientists are completely off their rockers.
Don't they know that it is embryonic stem cells and the defeat of Bush that is the real cure for Parkinsons.
Thank you Michael J Fox!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039404</id>
	<title>Please note this won't reverse mitochondrial dmg</title>
	<author>WillAffleckUW</author>
	<datestamp>1257766320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While this will help - a lot - if after 7-10 years a cure completes human trials - it won't fix the mitochondrial damage that has already taken place.</p><p>However, a period of fasting (10-14 days) should force telomere resets in most cells and force a mitochondrial rebuild, which might work as a follow up to this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While this will help - a lot - if after 7-10 years a cure completes human trials - it wo n't fix the mitochondrial damage that has already taken place.However , a period of fasting ( 10-14 days ) should force telomere resets in most cells and force a mitochondrial rebuild , which might work as a follow up to this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While this will help - a lot - if after 7-10 years a cure completes human trials - it won't fix the mitochondrial damage that has already taken place.However, a period of fasting (10-14 days) should force telomere resets in most cells and force a mitochondrial rebuild, which might work as a follow up to this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040722</id>
	<title>Re:Cure, eh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257773520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Treatments that can cure you when your body can't do it on it's own? Ever heard of tuberculosis? Or any serious infectious disease?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Treatments that can cure you when your body ca n't do it on it 's own ?
Ever heard of tuberculosis ?
Or any serious infectious disease ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Treatments that can cure you when your body can't do it on it's own?
Ever heard of tuberculosis?
Or any serious infectious disease?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037360</id>
	<title>Wouldn't it be nice if this were NOT vapor?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257757740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wouldn't it be nice if this were NOT vapor?  I'd like to see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael\_J.\_Fox" title="wikipedia.org">Michael J. Fox</a> [wikipedia.org] be able to stay around as long as possible.</p><p>Here's to hoping this pans out.  Cheers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't it be nice if this were NOT vapor ?
I 'd like to see Michael J. Fox [ wikipedia.org ] be able to stay around as long as possible.Here 's to hoping this pans out .
Cheers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't it be nice if this were NOT vapor?
I'd like to see Michael J. Fox [wikipedia.org] be able to stay around as long as possible.Here's to hoping this pans out.
Cheers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039210</id>
	<title>Old target</title>
	<author>methano</author>
	<datestamp>1257765420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People have been working on finding selective inhibitors of the various PKC isozymes for about 20 years.  There are, supposedly, a number of diseases that will be cured when the right ones are found.  This target has the added difficulty of being behind the blood-brain barrier.  Although it is possible that a selective inhibitor of PKC delta that makes it through the blood-brain barrier and does what it is supposed to do and not a lot of other things, will be found in the next ten years;  ten years is an entirely speculative number.  What it means is somewhere between 5 and forever.

Also, given that there will be no organic chemists left in the US to do the work of this discovery, expect it to be an imported product.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People have been working on finding selective inhibitors of the various PKC isozymes for about 20 years .
There are , supposedly , a number of diseases that will be cured when the right ones are found .
This target has the added difficulty of being behind the blood-brain barrier .
Although it is possible that a selective inhibitor of PKC delta that makes it through the blood-brain barrier and does what it is supposed to do and not a lot of other things , will be found in the next ten years ; ten years is an entirely speculative number .
What it means is somewhere between 5 and forever .
Also , given that there will be no organic chemists left in the US to do the work of this discovery , expect it to be an imported product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have been working on finding selective inhibitors of the various PKC isozymes for about 20 years.
There are, supposedly, a number of diseases that will be cured when the right ones are found.
This target has the added difficulty of being behind the blood-brain barrier.
Although it is possible that a selective inhibitor of PKC delta that makes it through the blood-brain barrier and does what it is supposed to do and not a lot of other things, will be found in the next ten years;  ten years is an entirely speculative number.
What it means is somewhere between 5 and forever.
Also, given that there will be no organic chemists left in the US to do the work of this discovery, expect it to be an imported product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039736</id>
	<title>Re:Cure, eh?</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1257768240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I was a kid 20-mumble years ago, I knew someone who got Hodgkin's lymphoma (or "disease" at the time).  His family prepared for the inevitable death that was to come a few months later.  Today, the cure rate is 90\% - it's the cancer you <em>want</em> to get if you're going to have one.  I'm personally pretty happy with the cure rates we're seeing in some previously fatal diseases.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was a kid 20-mumble years ago , I knew someone who got Hodgkin 's lymphoma ( or " disease " at the time ) .
His family prepared for the inevitable death that was to come a few months later .
Today , the cure rate is 90 \ % - it 's the cancer you want to get if you 're going to have one .
I 'm personally pretty happy with the cure rates we 're seeing in some previously fatal diseases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was a kid 20-mumble years ago, I knew someone who got Hodgkin's lymphoma (or "disease" at the time).
His family prepared for the inevitable death that was to come a few months later.
Today, the cure rate is 90\% - it's the cancer you want to get if you're going to have one.
I'm personally pretty happy with the cure rates we're seeing in some previously fatal diseases.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30041642</id>
	<title>sell:shoes,handbags,T-shirt,Jeans,sunglass</title>
	<author>coolforsale2009</author>
	<datestamp>1257780900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In order to meet the Thanksgiving holiday, this site hereby release Thanksgiving gift, that is, gift, our web site is <a href="http://www.coolforsale.com/" title="coolforsale.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.coolforsale.com/</a> [coolforsale.com]   nike air max jordan shoes, coach,gucci,lv,dg,ed hardy handbags, Polo/Ed Hardy/Lacoste/Ca/A&amp;F<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,T-shirt welcome new and old customers come to order.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In order to meet the Thanksgiving holiday , this site hereby release Thanksgiving gift , that is , gift , our web site is http : //www.coolforsale.com/ [ coolforsale.com ] nike air max jordan shoes , coach,gucci,lv,dg,ed hardy handbags , Polo/Ed Hardy/Lacoste/Ca/A&amp;F ,T-shirt welcome new and old customers come to order .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In order to meet the Thanksgiving holiday, this site hereby release Thanksgiving gift, that is, gift, our web site is http://www.coolforsale.com/ [coolforsale.com]   nike air max jordan shoes, coach,gucci,lv,dg,ed hardy handbags, Polo/Ed Hardy/Lacoste/Ca/A&amp;F ,T-shirt welcome new and old customers come to order.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037546</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257758460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>As someone whose grandfather had Parkinson's disease, I can assure you that they are never short of volunteers for clinical trials. Those come before FDA approval.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone whose grandfather had Parkinson 's disease , I can assure you that they are never short of volunteers for clinical trials .
Those come before FDA approval .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone whose grandfather had Parkinson's disease, I can assure you that they are never short of volunteers for clinical trials.
Those come before FDA approval.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037604</id>
	<title>How do they calculate the time needed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257758640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really, I'm curious to know?</p><p>I mean, if you find something really promising, don't you try to accelerate the testing?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , I 'm curious to know ? I mean , if you find something really promising , do n't you try to accelerate the testing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, I'm curious to know?I mean, if you find something really promising, don't you try to accelerate the testing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037996</id>
	<title>Re:How do they calculate the time needed</title>
	<author>PotatoFarmer</author>
	<datestamp>1257760320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Probably has something to do with the length of time necessary to complete <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical\_trial" title="wikipedia.org">Clinical Trials</a> [wikipedia.org] for FDA (or equivalent regulatory agency) approval.  Given that this process is still in the research phase and has not yet progressed to a testable drug state, 10 years sounds about right.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably has something to do with the length of time necessary to complete Clinical Trials [ wikipedia.org ] for FDA ( or equivalent regulatory agency ) approval .
Given that this process is still in the research phase and has not yet progressed to a testable drug state , 10 years sounds about right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably has something to do with the length of time necessary to complete Clinical Trials [wikipedia.org] for FDA (or equivalent regulatory agency) approval.
Given that this process is still in the research phase and has not yet progressed to a testable drug state, 10 years sounds about right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037874</id>
	<title>Re:Skepticism may be warranted, here.</title>
	<author>Pedrito</author>
	<datestamp>1257759780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I'm not so sure "neutralizing" this kinase-C will result in any miracle cures, as the protein happens to have a lot of other uses in the body, per wikipedia:</i> <br> <br>

First of all, there isn't just one Protein Kinase C. There are a number of different versions with different jobs. Hence the list of the various isozymes in the article. The one in question is Protein Kinase C delta (PKC), and is NOT covered in the wikipedia article.<br> <br>

PKC mediates apoptosis, or programmed cell death, in certain dopamine producing neurons. By blocking the enzyme, you can prevent the apoptosis. Reading some of Dr. Kanthasamy's papers, it's clear that he's already found some agents that do this in animal models. This is, of course, a long way from human trials (10 years if things go well, I believe is what he said in the article). But this is very promising avenue of research.<br> <br>

What I can't figure out is why this is recent news. Dr. Kanthasamy has clearly been following this line of research for a few years. There's a 2007 paper entitled <a href="http://stke.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/jpet;322/3/913" title="sciencemag.org">Neuroprotective Effect of Protein Kinase C{delta} Inhibitor Rottlerin in Cell Culture and Animal Models of Parkinson's Disease</a> [sciencemag.org], so clearly he had already connected PKC with PD and was already investigating agents to block it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not so sure " neutralizing " this kinase-C will result in any miracle cures , as the protein happens to have a lot of other uses in the body , per wikipedia : First of all , there is n't just one Protein Kinase C. There are a number of different versions with different jobs .
Hence the list of the various isozymes in the article .
The one in question is Protein Kinase C delta ( PKC ) , and is NOT covered in the wikipedia article .
PKC mediates apoptosis , or programmed cell death , in certain dopamine producing neurons .
By blocking the enzyme , you can prevent the apoptosis .
Reading some of Dr. Kanthasamy 's papers , it 's clear that he 's already found some agents that do this in animal models .
This is , of course , a long way from human trials ( 10 years if things go well , I believe is what he said in the article ) .
But this is very promising avenue of research .
What I ca n't figure out is why this is recent news .
Dr. Kanthasamy has clearly been following this line of research for a few years .
There 's a 2007 paper entitled Neuroprotective Effect of Protein Kinase C { delta } Inhibitor Rottlerin in Cell Culture and Animal Models of Parkinson 's Disease [ sciencemag.org ] , so clearly he had already connected PKC with PD and was already investigating agents to block it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not so sure "neutralizing" this kinase-C will result in any miracle cures, as the protein happens to have a lot of other uses in the body, per wikipedia:  

First of all, there isn't just one Protein Kinase C. There are a number of different versions with different jobs.
Hence the list of the various isozymes in the article.
The one in question is Protein Kinase C delta (PKC), and is NOT covered in the wikipedia article.
PKC mediates apoptosis, or programmed cell death, in certain dopamine producing neurons.
By blocking the enzyme, you can prevent the apoptosis.
Reading some of Dr. Kanthasamy's papers, it's clear that he's already found some agents that do this in animal models.
This is, of course, a long way from human trials (10 years if things go well, I believe is what he said in the article).
But this is very promising avenue of research.
What I can't figure out is why this is recent news.
Dr. Kanthasamy has clearly been following this line of research for a few years.
There's a 2007 paper entitled Neuroprotective Effect of Protein Kinase C{delta} Inhibitor Rottlerin in Cell Culture and Animal Models of Parkinson's Disease [sciencemag.org], so clearly he had already connected PKC with PD and was already investigating agents to block it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037400</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30043044</id>
	<title>Re:Skepticism may be warranted, here.</title>
	<author>simoncpu was here</author>
	<datestamp>1257884520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What happens when you turn off apoptosis, and cells which turn "sick" are no longer able to die?</p></div><p>Zombies!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What happens when you turn off apoptosis , and cells which turn " sick " are no longer able to die ? Zombies !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happens when you turn off apoptosis, and cells which turn "sick" are no longer able to die?Zombies!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038422</id>
	<title>Re:Parkinson's Disease questions</title>
	<author>reverseengineer</author>
	<datestamp>1257762060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same substance, different parts of the brain.  There are several different pathways that involve the release of dopamine; the mesolimbic pathway is where most of the behavioral functions of dopamine occur, and the nigrostriatal pathway, which is involved in motor control.  In Parkinson's, the dopamine releasing neurons of the substantia nigra (at one end of the nigrostriatal pathway) die, leading to the characteristic motor symptoms.  However, many drugs that act on dopamine pathways, particularly older ones, tend to be nonspecific, and can produce side effects from working on the other pathways- like the movement disorders associated with antipsychotic drugs, for instance.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same substance , different parts of the brain .
There are several different pathways that involve the release of dopamine ; the mesolimbic pathway is where most of the behavioral functions of dopamine occur , and the nigrostriatal pathway , which is involved in motor control .
In Parkinson 's , the dopamine releasing neurons of the substantia nigra ( at one end of the nigrostriatal pathway ) die , leading to the characteristic motor symptoms .
However , many drugs that act on dopamine pathways , particularly older ones , tend to be nonspecific , and can produce side effects from working on the other pathways- like the movement disorders associated with antipsychotic drugs , for instance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same substance, different parts of the brain.
There are several different pathways that involve the release of dopamine; the mesolimbic pathway is where most of the behavioral functions of dopamine occur, and the nigrostriatal pathway, which is involved in motor control.
In Parkinson's, the dopamine releasing neurons of the substantia nigra (at one end of the nigrostriatal pathway) die, leading to the characteristic motor symptoms.
However, many drugs that act on dopamine pathways, particularly older ones, tend to be nonspecific, and can produce side effects from working on the other pathways- like the movement disorders associated with antipsychotic drugs, for instance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040414</id>
	<title>2400 mg Co Q10</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257771660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2400 mg of Co Q10 with 1200 IU of vitmamin E - works well. I know someone who has Parkinsons - and the CO Q10 basically stopped the progression of the disease for the last 4 years.</p><p>Less than 1200 mg of CO Q10 has very little effect. Co Q10 without Vitamin E also has little effect. They did a study with 300 mg and found no difference with the Placebo. A study with 1200 mg found 44\% difference with Placebo.  I think 2400 mg is regarded as the optimum level.</p><p>The problem is that Co Q10 is sometimes either expensive or bad quality. And patients try to save by either taking cheap Co Q10 or less of it.</p><p>Here are some studies pro and against:</p><p>For (2002 NIH study at 800 mg and 1200 mg):<br>http://www.ninds.nih.gov/news\_and\_events/news\_articles/pressrelease\_parkinsons\_coenzymeq10\_101402.htm</p><p>Against (2007 German study but 300 mg):<br>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070514174229.htm</p><p>Current Clinical Trial (started 2008 with 1200 mg and 2400 mg):<br>http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00740714</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2400 mg of Co Q10 with 1200 IU of vitmamin E - works well .
I know someone who has Parkinsons - and the CO Q10 basically stopped the progression of the disease for the last 4 years.Less than 1200 mg of CO Q10 has very little effect .
Co Q10 without Vitamin E also has little effect .
They did a study with 300 mg and found no difference with the Placebo .
A study with 1200 mg found 44 \ % difference with Placebo .
I think 2400 mg is regarded as the optimum level.The problem is that Co Q10 is sometimes either expensive or bad quality .
And patients try to save by either taking cheap Co Q10 or less of it.Here are some studies pro and against : For ( 2002 NIH study at 800 mg and 1200 mg ) : http : //www.ninds.nih.gov/news \ _and \ _events/news \ _articles/pressrelease \ _parkinsons \ _coenzymeq10 \ _101402.htmAgainst ( 2007 German study but 300 mg ) : http : //www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070514174229.htmCurrent Clinical Trial ( started 2008 with 1200 mg and 2400 mg ) : http : //clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00740714</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2400 mg of Co Q10 with 1200 IU of vitmamin E - works well.
I know someone who has Parkinsons - and the CO Q10 basically stopped the progression of the disease for the last 4 years.Less than 1200 mg of CO Q10 has very little effect.
Co Q10 without Vitamin E also has little effect.
They did a study with 300 mg and found no difference with the Placebo.
A study with 1200 mg found 44\% difference with Placebo.
I think 2400 mg is regarded as the optimum level.The problem is that Co Q10 is sometimes either expensive or bad quality.
And patients try to save by either taking cheap Co Q10 or less of it.Here are some studies pro and against:For (2002 NIH study at 800 mg and 1200 mg):http://www.ninds.nih.gov/news\_and\_events/news\_articles/pressrelease\_parkinsons\_coenzymeq10\_101402.htmAgainst (2007 German study but 300 mg):http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070514174229.htmCurrent Clinical Trial (started 2008 with 1200 mg and 2400 mg):http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00740714</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037816</id>
	<title>Excellent!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257759600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That sounds really dope!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That sounds really dope !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That sounds really dope!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037572</id>
	<title>What about my buzz?</title>
	<author>RiotingPacifist</author>
	<datestamp>1257758520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will these new drugs, help me keep my buzz going for longer?  If so will somebody please think of the children!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will these new drugs , help me keep my buzz going for longer ?
If so will somebody please think of the children !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will these new drugs, help me keep my buzz going for longer?
If so will somebody please think of the children!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300</id>
	<title>I don't know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257757500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This research seems kinda shaky.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This research seems kinda shaky .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This research seems kinda shaky.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037704</id>
	<title>BTTF 4</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257759060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally, M.J.Fox can make Back To The Future 4 !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , M.J.Fox can make Back To The Future 4 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, M.J.Fox can make Back To The Future 4 !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>ColdWetDog</author>
	<datestamp>1257758460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective? If the cure kills 5\% of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a "perfect" cure out of the lab and through FDA testing.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>


Firstly, there are drugs that are moderately effective in Parkinson's Disease - not curative, but they do significantly improve patient functioning.  Secondly, and most importantly, they found enzyme that they affects dopamine levels.  They HAVE NOT (at least as far as I can tell from TFA) found that they can reverse the clinical entity known as Parkinson's disease by altering the function of that enzyme.  That's first.<br> <br>
Then they have to find something (a drug or other treatment modality) that alters enzyme function that can get into brain (not easy) and not trash everything else in sight and / or <i>create more problems than it solves</i>.In this case, the bar is going to be set fairly high.<br> <br>
There are countless potential medical breakthroughs stuck at this stage.  Very interesting, likely very important.  Very speculative.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective ?
If the cure kills 5 \ % of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a " perfect " cure out of the lab and through FDA testing .
Firstly , there are drugs that are moderately effective in Parkinson 's Disease - not curative , but they do significantly improve patient functioning .
Secondly , and most importantly , they found enzyme that they affects dopamine levels .
They HAVE NOT ( at least as far as I can tell from TFA ) found that they can reverse the clinical entity known as Parkinson 's disease by altering the function of that enzyme .
That 's first .
Then they have to find something ( a drug or other treatment modality ) that alters enzyme function that can get into brain ( not easy ) and not trash everything else in sight and / or create more problems than it solves.In this case , the bar is going to be set fairly high .
There are countless potential medical breakthroughs stuck at this stage .
Very interesting , likely very important .
Very speculative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the disease leads to paralysis then death how safe does it have to be to be effective?
If the cure kills 5\% of the people that take it I would think that will be less than the 10 year delay in getting a "perfect" cure out of the lab and through FDA testing.
Firstly, there are drugs that are moderately effective in Parkinson's Disease - not curative, but they do significantly improve patient functioning.
Secondly, and most importantly, they found enzyme that they affects dopamine levels.
They HAVE NOT (at least as far as I can tell from TFA) found that they can reverse the clinical entity known as Parkinson's disease by altering the function of that enzyme.
That's first.
Then they have to find something (a drug or other treatment modality) that alters enzyme function that can get into brain (not easy) and not trash everything else in sight and / or create more problems than it solves.In this case, the bar is going to be set fairly high.
There are countless potential medical breakthroughs stuck at this stage.
Very interesting, likely very important.
Very speculative.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037334</id>
	<title>huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257757680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>'Once we find the compound, we need to make sure it&rsquo;s safe.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... says Kanthasamy."</p></div><p>This is not quite doing it for me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'Once we find the compound , we need to make sure it    s safe .
... says Kanthasamy .
" This is not quite doing it for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Once we find the compound, we need to make sure it’s safe.
... says Kanthasamy.
"This is not quite doing it for me.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042574</id>
	<title>Not A Cure</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1257791640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Title should read "dopamine producing cell killers"</p><p>The research may lead to a treatment to stop the progression. It cannot lead to a 'cure'. By the time symptoms are noticed, about 2/3 of the dopamine producing cells are dead. No matter how loud and clear you tell the remaining cells to stop dying off ('halting apoptosis'; essentialy what the research is about), the dead ones stay dead.</p><p>There is already a (partial) cure for Parky's: fetal stem cell injection. It worked 20 years ago, and it'd work today if it were allowed. The above research isn't required for this, but it would prevent loss of other original neurons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Title should read " dopamine producing cell killers " The research may lead to a treatment to stop the progression .
It can not lead to a 'cure' .
By the time symptoms are noticed , about 2/3 of the dopamine producing cells are dead .
No matter how loud and clear you tell the remaining cells to stop dying off ( 'halting apoptosis ' ; essentialy what the research is about ) , the dead ones stay dead.There is already a ( partial ) cure for Parky 's : fetal stem cell injection .
It worked 20 years ago , and it 'd work today if it were allowed .
The above research is n't required for this , but it would prevent loss of other original neurons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Title should read "dopamine producing cell killers"The research may lead to a treatment to stop the progression.
It cannot lead to a 'cure'.
By the time symptoms are noticed, about 2/3 of the dopamine producing cells are dead.
No matter how loud and clear you tell the remaining cells to stop dying off ('halting apoptosis'; essentialy what the research is about), the dead ones stay dead.There is already a (partial) cure for Parky's: fetal stem cell injection.
It worked 20 years ago, and it'd work today if it were allowed.
The above research isn't required for this, but it would prevent loss of other original neurons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037594</id>
	<title>So how does this relate to....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257758640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>... Certain typical Anti-Psychotic medicine, like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haldol" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Haldol</a> [wikipedia.org], which typically exhibit the side-effect of Parkinson-like-symptoms ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>... Certain typical Anti-Psychotic medicine , like Haldol [ wikipedia.org ] , which typically exhibit the side-effect of Parkinson-like-symptoms ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Certain typical Anti-Psychotic medicine, like Haldol [wikipedia.org], which typically exhibit the side-effect of Parkinson-like-symptoms ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042614</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>Andvari</author>
	<datestamp>1257792060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Even if you induce neuronal growth, the brain will have to relearn the connections it needs to make, which took a lifetime to form.  Forget about playing the piano again.  You'll have to relearn to play (although you'll still have the conceptual knowledge).</p></div><p>Wrong.  The striatum (which governs procedural memory) is only indirectly affected in parkinson's.  Parkinson's is caused by the death of dopamine producing cells in the substantia nigra which is the region that communicates with the striatum.  The memory of these movements (such as playing a piano) is still there, but the ability to access them is not.  One of the things that is noticeable about parkinson's patients is that many of the jerky movements and tics caused by the medication are often movements that would otherwise be normal in a different setting (some of the ones I've seen include: moving pieces on a chess board, dancing and writing on a blackboard).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if you induce neuronal growth , the brain will have to relearn the connections it needs to make , which took a lifetime to form .
Forget about playing the piano again .
You 'll have to relearn to play ( although you 'll still have the conceptual knowledge ) .Wrong .
The striatum ( which governs procedural memory ) is only indirectly affected in parkinson 's .
Parkinson 's is caused by the death of dopamine producing cells in the substantia nigra which is the region that communicates with the striatum .
The memory of these movements ( such as playing a piano ) is still there , but the ability to access them is not .
One of the things that is noticeable about parkinson 's patients is that many of the jerky movements and tics caused by the medication are often movements that would otherwise be normal in a different setting ( some of the ones I 've seen include : moving pieces on a chess board , dancing and writing on a blackboard ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Even if you induce neuronal growth, the brain will have to relearn the connections it needs to make, which took a lifetime to form.
Forget about playing the piano again.
You'll have to relearn to play (although you'll still have the conceptual knowledge).Wrong.
The striatum (which governs procedural memory) is only indirectly affected in parkinson's.
Parkinson's is caused by the death of dopamine producing cells in the substantia nigra which is the region that communicates with the striatum.
The memory of these movements (such as playing a piano) is still there, but the ability to access them is not.
One of the things that is noticeable about parkinson's patients is that many of the jerky movements and tics caused by the medication are often movements that would otherwise be normal in a different setting (some of the ones I've seen include: moving pieces on a chess board, dancing and writing on a blackboard).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30044798</id>
	<title>Re:Wouldn't it be nice if this were NOT vapor?</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1257864360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really, you want that little bugger to still be around, I thought he died along time ago, when that show of his with heather locklear got cancelled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , you want that little bugger to still be around , I thought he died along time ago , when that show of his with heather locklear got cancelled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, you want that little bugger to still be around, I thought he died along time ago, when that show of his with heather locklear got cancelled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037402</id>
	<title>Parkinson's Disease questions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257757920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is the dopamine-hindrance the primary cause of Parkinson's?  Is Parkinson's generally associated with depression due to lack of dopamine?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the dopamine-hindrance the primary cause of Parkinson 's ?
Is Parkinson 's generally associated with depression due to lack of dopamine ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the dopamine-hindrance the primary cause of Parkinson's?
Is Parkinson's generally associated with depression due to lack of dopamine?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038700</id>
	<title>pardon me?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257763140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"10 years" and "major breakthrough"? Somethind doesn't add up here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" 10 years " and " major breakthrough " ?
Somethind does n't add up here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"10 years" and "major breakthrough"?
Somethind doesn't add up here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040066</id>
	<title>Re:huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257769980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm the original AC.</p><p>Awarding Obama the Nobel prize is also not quite doing it for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm the original AC.Awarding Obama the Nobel prize is also not quite doing it for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm the original AC.Awarding Obama the Nobel prize is also not quite doing it for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037334</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039912</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>giorgist</author>
	<datestamp>1257769260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Do no harm"<br><br>It should improve the rest, or at least we shoudl be able to stop treatment for those that it doesn't.<br><br>G</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do no harm " It should improve the rest , or at least we shoudl be able to stop treatment for those that it does n't.G</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Do no harm"It should improve the rest, or at least we shoudl be able to stop treatment for those that it doesn't.G</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038550</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm, how safe is safe enough?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257762540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're making it a black and white issue, under your assumption it's either snake oil or it's a perfect cure. In the real world there are shades of grey and we are shooting for (and paying for) 99.9\% black but are probably really getting 97\% black when we get anything at all, many diseases go untreated because it's too expensive to develop a drug with a small potential patient set. What I'm proposing is relaxing things to a target of say 95\% black when the disease warrants it. It's kind of like uptime in IT, most organizations don't need 5 9's uptime and can't afford it so they go for something more affordable which still brings significant benefits to the organization.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're making it a black and white issue , under your assumption it 's either snake oil or it 's a perfect cure .
In the real world there are shades of grey and we are shooting for ( and paying for ) 99.9 \ % black but are probably really getting 97 \ % black when we get anything at all , many diseases go untreated because it 's too expensive to develop a drug with a small potential patient set .
What I 'm proposing is relaxing things to a target of say 95 \ % black when the disease warrants it .
It 's kind of like uptime in IT , most organizations do n't need 5 9 's uptime and ca n't afford it so they go for something more affordable which still brings significant benefits to the organization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're making it a black and white issue, under your assumption it's either snake oil or it's a perfect cure.
In the real world there are shades of grey and we are shooting for (and paying for) 99.9\% black but are probably really getting 97\% black when we get anything at all, many diseases go untreated because it's too expensive to develop a drug with a small potential patient set.
What I'm proposing is relaxing things to a target of say 95\% black when the disease warrants it.
It's kind of like uptime in IT, most organizations don't need 5 9's uptime and can't afford it so they go for something more affordable which still brings significant benefits to the organization.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038216</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30041062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30057606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30043044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30043140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30044798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1824234_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038422
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037996
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038902
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30043140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038128
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30043044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037552
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040478
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037900
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30040026
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042022
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038216
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038550
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30042752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30057606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30037734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30041062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30044798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30038700
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1824234.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1824234.30039404
</commentlist>
</conversation>
